Idaho Fish and Game | Idaho Fish and Game - Idaho Sage-grouse … · 2019-05-28 · measurable habitat restoration (based on Restoration Emphasis Areas) or maintenance goals for each

2011 Chapter 6 updates and accomplishments ♦ 1

Appendix D: Progress on State Plan Implementation Tasks

6.1 Local Working Group Milestones

Task Responsible Party 2009-2011 Accomplishments

Next Steps or Target

Deadline

6.1.1. Initiate formal Local Working Group

(LWG) in Mountain Home.

Idaho Department

of Fish and Game

(IDFG)

Group met 6 times in 2011, but no progress towards

development of local plan.

Target Deadline: July 1,

2010

6.1.2. LWGs provide annual report to Sage-

grouse Advisory Committee Technical Assistance

Team (SAC TAT).

LWGs Statewide LWG Annual Report published annually. Next Steps: Due January

15, annually

6.1.3. LWGs without completed plans will

finalize their plans.

LWGs 9 LWGs have completed plans as of January 1, 2012. Next Steps: LWGs

complete their plans within

2 years of formation of the

group.

6.1.4. Identify funding needs and funding sources

to implement the Conservation Plan for the

Greater Sage-grouse in Idaho (i.e. State Plan)

and LWG plans, including support for LWG

facilitators.

LWGs, Sage-

grouse Advisory

Committee (SAC),

SAC Funding

Subcommittee

Funding and cost-share has been received from

numerous organizations including Bureau of Land

Management (BLM), IDFG, U.S. Forest Service

(FS), Natural Resources Conservation Service

(NRCS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),

Idaho Department of Lands (IDL), Department of

Energy (DOE), North American Grouse Partnership,

the Nature Conservancy (TNC), Resource

Conservation and Development councils, soil

conservation districts, cooperative weed management

areas, private landowners, other non-governmental

organization, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Shoshone-

Bannock Tribes, etc.

IDFG and OSC provided a funding summary at the

November 2011 SAC meeting.

Next Steps: Develop a 5-

year plan of funding needs

and existing commitments

for plan implementation by

October 31, 2010. This

plan will be updated in

October each year.

At the November 2011

SAC meeting, the SAC

Funding Subcommittee

delayed the 5-year plan

given current uncertainty

regarding federal funding

sources.

A funding summary will be

included in the 2009 Annual

Statewide Sage-grouse

Report and annually




Deadline

thereafter.

6.1.5. Refine LWG boundaries. Affected LWGs in

coordination with

SAC TAT

Completed 2009. Target Deadline: December

31, 2009

6.1.6. As information becomes available, develop

measurable habitat restoration (based on

Restoration Emphasis Areas) or maintenance

goals for each Sage-grouse Planning Area

(SGPA) during development of LWG plans (see

page 1-32). LWGs with completed plans should

confirm, revise, or develop goals.

LWGs, in

coordination with

private landowners,

and local, state, and

federal agencies


2010

6.2 Sage-grouse Advisory Committee Milestones



Deadline

6.2.1. Review and update (if needed) State Plan SAC On hold Target Deadline: Evaluate

need in 2010

6.2.2. Research mitigation and crediting programs

used by other states and the federal government

in shrubsteppe or other habitats (e.g., wetlands).

Compile results and develop options for

mitigation and crediting program for sagebrush

steppe habitats in Idaho.

SAC Mitigation

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

Idaho Governor’s

Office of Species

Conservation

(OSC)

The Mitigation Subcommittee researched a variety of

mitigation and crediting programs. Options from

various programs were considered during the

development of a mitigation framework for sage-

grouse habitat in Idaho


2010

6.2.3. Review USFWS Status Report and Ecology

and Conservation of Greater Sage-grouse: a

Landscape Species and its Habitats to be

published in Studies in Avian Biology winter

2009/2010.

SAC TAT SAC members have given 3 presentations thus far at

SAC meetings. Kendra Womack, USFWS,

summarized the USFWS findings at the March 2010

SAC meeting.

The SAC TAT agreed this is an ongoing task. They

will continue to solicit for presentations.

Target Deadline: April

2010

6.2.4. Develop proposal for a mitigation and SAC Mitigation The Mitigation Subcommittee presented a draft of a Next Steps: Finalize




Deadline

crediting program for sagebrush steppe habitats in

Idaho and develop recommendations for policy

consideration.

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC, SAC TAT

compensatory mitigation framework to state and

federal agencies, and the SAC August-October 2010.

In December 2010, the SAC approved the mitigation

framework to be submitted for consideration by

relevant entities. In early 2011, the Mitigation

Subcommittee presented the framework to IDFG,

BLM, FS, OSC, Office of Energy Resources, the

Governor’s Office, the Idaho Association of

Counties, and Rocky Mountain Power. Some minor

changes were made after these meetings. In August

2011, the Mitigation Subcommittee submitted the

proposal to IDFG and OSC for consideration. The

agencies replied they could not provide a definitive

response but commit to being as timely as the need

for multi-level state coordination allows.

proposal by December 1,

2010

6.2.5. Compile and post on the IDFG website the

Annual Statewide Sage-grouse Report which will

include: LWG Annual Reports, Chapter 6

Accomplishments, and Annual SAC Report.

SAC TAT Statewide LWG Annual Report published annually. Next Steps: Publish by

March 1, annually

6.2.6. Update sage-grouse page on IDFG website

with SAC meeting summaries, quarterly

newsletters, links to current literature by subject

and other information.

SAC TAT Upgraded webpage in 2008 and 2011.

Next Steps: Quarterly

6.2.7. Help LWGs find funding sources for large-

scale habitat restoration projects that may cross

LWG boundaries.

SAC, in

coordination with

LWGs

Target Deadline: Ongoing

6.2.8. Consider development of threats and

conservation measures for invasive plant species

and noxious weeds to be included in future

revision of State Plan.

SAC Target Deadline: Based

on 6.2.1.

6.2.9. Establish SAC Technical Assistance Team

(TAT), to aid in habitat, population, and data

management/ analysis tasks.

IDFG, SAC SAC TAT established in 2006.

Next Steps: Ongoing

6.2.10. Develop and publish hard-copy photo University of Completed. Target Deadline: March




Deadline

guide to help landowners and the public

recognize suitable sage-grouse seasonal habitats

throughout their range in Idaho.

Idaho, in

cooperation with

BLM, IDFG and

LWGs.

Gillan, J. K., and E. K. Strand. 2010. Sage-grouse

habitat in Idaho: a practical guide for land owners and

managers. Contribution Number 1048, Idaho Forest,

Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, University of

Idaho, Moscow.

2010

6.2.11. Distribute photo guide to landowners, the

general public, and interested user groups.

BLM, FS, IDFG,

IDL, NRCS, Idaho

State Department

of Agriculture

(ISDA), and

LWGs.

Completed. Guide has been distributed to LWGs,

IDFG and NRCS offices. It is also available for

download at:

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/plans/sage

_grouse/

Target Deadline: March

2010

6.2.12. Develop SAC Education Subcommittee to

collaboratively develop educational materials and

programs; share lessons learned and success

stories with LWGs and the public.

SAC SAC Education Subcommittee met December 15,

2010.

The Education Subcommittee has gathered together

much of the available educational materials about

sage-grouse and will not develop additional

educational materials or programs at this time (with

the exception of PowerPoint presentations in 6.2.17).

Several new products are currently available, these

include:

Sage-grouse Habitat in Idaho: A Practical Guide for

Land Owners and Managers (U of I)

Sage-grouse: Icon of the West (USFWS)

These documents are available for download on the

IDFG website and have been widely distributed via

email and hard copies.

NRCS Sage-grouse Initiative promotional materials.

The link to the NRCS website is on the IDFG sage-

grouse web page.

The SAC Education Subcommittee will utilize the

SAC Quarterly Newsletter to share information on

sage-grouse project successes. In addition, see 6.2.13

and 6.2.14.

Target Deadline: January

2010




Deadline

6.2.13. Develop sage-grouse educational

materials to be incorporated into education

curricula, such as Idaho Rangeland Resource

Commission (IRRC).

SAC Education

Subcommittee in

coordination with

IRRC and other

interested groups

IDFG had a project WILD program for educators

about sage-grouse and sharp-tailed grouse in Twin

Falls in 2010. Dialogue has been established between

this program and IRRC.


2010

6.2.14. Develop planning and support protocols

to assist SAC and LWGs on field trips.

SAC Education

Subcommittee

Completed, available from IDFG upon request. Target Deadline: April

2010

6.2.15. Consider biennial LWG Conference, to

focus on sharing information and success stories

among LWGs.

SAC and SAC

Education

Subcommittee

On hold, pending future funding. Target Deadline: April

2010

6.2.16. Consider sage-grouse educational seminar

that would be open to the general public.

SAC and SAC

Education

Subcommittee

On hold, pending future funding. Target Deadline: April

2011

6.2.17. Develop PowerPoint presentation

materials that can be used by SAC, LWG

members, and agency personnel to educate the

public and user groups (e.g., Off-Highway

Vehicle [OHV] groups) about sage-grouse and

their habitat.

SAC Education

Subcommittee


2010

6.2.18. Pursue opportunity to use uncompensated

time and expenses from non-governmental

organization members, landowners, and general

public for funding cost share on sage-grouse

projects.

SAC Funding

Subcommittee

In 2011 SAC and LWG volunteer hours were used as

matching funds to secure grants from the BLM and

USFWS for SAC and LWG facilitation.

Target Deadline: July

2010 and annually

thereafter


6.3 Rangewide Policy Milestones

Task Responsible Party

2009-2011 Accomplishments Next Steps or Target

Deadline

6.3.1. Work with other Western states and federal

agencies to assure that development stipulations

(e.g., lek buffers, No Surface Occupancy

stipulations) are similar among states, with a clear

link to science.

IDFG in

coordination with

other agencies

Target Deadline: Initiate

discussion at July 2010

Western Association of

Fish and Wildlife Agencies

(WAFWA) meeting.


agencies to assure that “core areas” are defined,

delineated, and mapped similarly among states.

IDFG in

coordination with

other agencies



WAFWA meeting.


agencies to develop rangewide lek status

definitions.

IDFG in

coordination with

other agencies



WAFWA meeting.


6.4 Conservation Measures Milestones

6.4.1 Wildfire



Deadline

6.4.1.1. Ensure the BLM/FS Fire Management

Plans, Fire Management Unit Databases, and

related tools are updated annually, based on the

most recent Sage-Grouse Habitat Planning Map.

BLM, FS Five dispatch centers in southern Idaho send

interagency fire suppression resources based on

predetermined response plans for each response

area. The response is dependent on fire danger

levels, weather, access, and resource availability. In

multiple ignition events, fire managers make

judgment calls to adjust the response. Implemented

BLM Idaho Instruction Memorandum (IM) IM ID-

2008-051 Districts update Fire Management Plans

and dispatch information with the latest sage-grouse

habitat information. Also directed Districts to

identify, in GIS, highest priority sage-grouse

habitats for use by dispatch.

FS fire management plans in southern Idaho reflect

priorities for protecting sage-grouse habitat. Fire

Management Plans have been reviewed and updated

annually since 2005.

Next Steps: BLM and FS

will continue to review and

validate Fire Management

Plans annually.

6.4.1.2. Require, if practical, the washing of the

undercarriage of fire vehicles and equipment

prior to deployment and prior to demobilization

from fires, to reduce spread of seeds of invasive

species.

BLM, FS, IDL

BLM Idaho Falls and Twin Falls Districts: The

2008 Record of Decision for the Fire, Fuels and

Related Vegetation Management Direction Plan

Amendment recommends cleaning equipment

before and after Type I and II wildfire incidents. It

also recommends that staging areas and fire camps

should avoid sites with noxious weeds.

The Southwestern Idaho (Boise District) Fire

Planning Unit Fire Management Plan directs that

equipment will be cleaned before arriving on-site,

and where possible vehicle wash stations will be set

up in base camps. Staging areas and fire camps

should be located on sites free of invasive non-

native species.

Next Steps: Ongoing




Deadline

All National Forests in Southern Idaho have

incorporated invasive species prevention practices

into their Forest Fire Management Plans as of 2008.

IDL requires the washing of undercarriage of all its

fire vehicles and equipment prior to deployment to

reduce spread of invasive species.

6.4.1.3. Use knowledgeable resource advisors on

fires threatening sage-grouse habitats to provide

guidance on sage-grouse habitat protection.

Incorporate maps of sage-grouse habitats into

fire management plans to ensure the protection

of these habitats during wildfire suppression

efforts.

BLM, FS, IDL

BLM implemented IM ID-2008-051 emphasizing

Resource Advisors, knowledgeable about local

wildlife habitat concerns, are assigned to fires

within or threatening Key habitat.

FS assigns Resource Advisors to extended attack or

large fires. A person knowledgeable about sage-

grouse habitat is assigned when these fires occur in

sage-grouse habitat.

Next Steps: Ongoing.

6.4.1.4. Incorporate training in sage-grouse

conservation and suppression priorities during

annual agency firefighter training; include Rural

Fire Districts when possible.

BLM, FS, IDL

BLM implemented IM ID-2008-051. Managers/fire

personnel ensure that briefings are provided to

incident commanders, dispatch and engine bosses

early in the fire season regarding the importance of

protecting sage-grouse habitat and sagebrush

steppe.

The FS discusses the importance of protecting sage-

grouse habitat annually at Inter-Agency Spring Fire

Operations Meetings.

Next Steps: Annually,

before the ensuing fire

season.

6.4.1.5. Minimize loss of sagebrush during fire

suppression and mop up activities.

BLM, FS

BLM issued IM ID-2008-051 which emphasizes

tactics that are intended to minimize loss of

sagebrush, such as avoiding burn-out of islands of

unburned sagebrush.

The BLM Idaho Falls District issues suppression

instructions for the liberal use of retardant in

sagebrush steppe habitat, especially occupied and

known historic sage-grouse habitat.

Next Steps: Ongoing.




Deadline

The FS discusses the importance of leaving

unburned islands of sagebrush within fire

perimeters at annual Inter-Agency Spring Fire

Operations Meetings.

6.4.1.6. Identify access roads where the

installation of additional fire danger signs may

be warranted. Install new signs as needed.

BLM, FS, IDL, in

cooperation with

LWGs

BLM and FS have installed numerous new signs

since 2006.

North Magic Valley: Sent letter to Kimama

Highway District requesting information on

maintenance of Carey-Kimama road in relation to

fire danger.

Upper Snake: Signs have been installed on high

access roads that pose fire hazards. There are

approximately 50 permanent fire danger signs on

the Targhee NF. Due to public concerns about sign

pollution, new signs are not placed. However, fire

crews patrol throughout the summer educating the

public about fire safety, putting out abandoned

campfires, and placing temporary signs during high

fire danger periods or during periods of fire

restrictions.

Next Steps: Ongoing as

needed

6.4.1.7. Increase emphasis on mapping known

water sources to ensure Interagency Fire

Dispatch Centers have the latest information for

fire suppression.

BLM, FS, state

agencies, in

cooperation with

landowners and

LWGs

Big Desert, Challis: Completed.

Upper Snake: Known water sources in the Big

Desert have been mapped. Efforts to map water

sources in Medicine Lodge and Sand Creek are

currently occurring. Additionally, efforts to

determine compatibility of existing water sources

with currently owned equipment is presently

occurring.

On the Forest, all known water sources are already

mapped and this information is at the interagency

fire dispatch center. They even know which water

bodies have whirling disease. The FS does not

utilize water troughs because that would create

conflicts with permittees and grazing management.

The FS has several engines and water tenders (both





Deadline

in-house and contract) that can get water to a dry

site. USFS fire fighting protocols have incorporated

sage-grouse considerations including ensuring that

incident command has information about leks, key

habitat, and brood areas; highly aggressive initial

attacks, and efforts to contain and maintain islands

of intact habitat.

6.4.1.8. In areas of limited water availability

identify new water sources for fire suppression.

Locate such water access facilities near suitable

access roads. Mark locations of new sites on

maps and distribute maps to Interagency

Dispatch Centers.

BLM, FS, state

agencies, in

cooperation with

landowners and

LWGs

Big Desert: 48,000 gallons available on private

landowner’s NRCS project. BLM installed 1.4

miles of pipeline which benefits sage-grouse by

reducing water truck activity in the allotment during

lekking and nesting and providing a source of water

for potential use during wildfire suppression

activities.

Upper Snake: Identification of new wells is on-

going. In addition, one local crop duster is known

to keep his plane loaded with water during fire

season and he responds to calls for spot fire

suppression on private ground.


6.4.1.9. Work with lessees, permittees and

private landowners to encourage that water

storage facilities remain full during the fire

season.

BLM, FS, IDL, in

cooperation with

LWGs

Big Desert: Addressed in BLM’s permitting

process.

Upper Snake: This is on-going. Generally done

verbally one-on-one between ranchers and

firefighters.

USFS permittees always keep their troughs full

during the fire season/grazing season. They have to

in order to provide for the cattle and maintain

distribution which enables them to keep their cattle

on the allotment for the full permitted season.

Target Deadline: June 1,

2010

6.4.1.10. Identify, prioritize, and implement fuel

breaks (e.g., mowing, herbicide application,

strictly managed grazed strips or green strips,

etc.) to aid in controlling wildfire should wildfire

occur near key sage-grouse habitats. Location of

fuel breaks should be based on 1) areas of high

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG, NRCS,

working with

LWGs

FS identified and implemented fuel breaks on the

Curlew National Grasslands in 2007 and 2008 in

order to protect remaining areas of unburned

sagebrush.

BLM identified and implemented fuel breaks on the

Next Steps: Ongoing




Deadline

fire risk; 2) protection of intact sagebrush

habitats; 3) protection of important sage-grouse

nesting, brood-rearing, and wintering areas; and

4) utilize existing roads where possible.

Big Desert in 2007-2011.

6.4.1.11. Explore options for agreements with

railroad companies to manage fuels/invasives

within railroad rights-of-way to minimize

wildfire ignitions.

BLM, FS, IDL As of January 2009, BLM is coordinating with

railroad companies. BLM provides fire prevention

presentations to railroad workers, and actively

pursues investigations and enforcement actions for

railroad fires, including reimbursement for fire

suppression costs associated with railroad-caused

fires.


2010

6.4.1.12. Work closely with utility companies to

reduce wildfire ignitions within rights-of-way.

BLM, FS, IDL BLM provides fire safety and prevention

presentations to power-line workers annually, and

has established a Memorandum of Agreement with

Idaho Power, with protocols for fire prevention and

safety, and for coordination during fires.

IDL (SW District) meets with all the three power

companies twice a year in the fall and spring.

East Idaho Dispatch meets with utility companies in

their dispatch area each spring.

Target Deadline:

December 31, 2010

6.4.1.13. Explore and implement use of targeted

grazing1 where fuel reduction is needed to

protect and enhance sage-grouse habitat.

BLM, FS, IDL,

NRCS, in

cooperation with

universities,

livestock operators,

and LWGs

Draft guidance is being developed by BLM.

Upper Snake: Currently working with ranchers to

target roadsides by leaving at least one band of

sheep or goats behind to graze through the growing

season along roadsides.

The USFS has flexibility built into allotment

management plans regarding on/off and pasture

rotation dates for fuel reduction or drought. Further,

utilization levels are limited to 50%. Upland areas

do not always reach 50%, but this approximate level

of utilization reduces fuels.

Target Deadline: Ongoing.

LWGs provide lists of

accomplishments, needs,

and proposals as part of

LWG annual reporting.

1 Targeted grazing is an application of livestock grazing at a specified season, duration and intensity to accomplish specific vegetation management goals. The

term “targeted” refers to the specific plant or landscape that is the aim of controlled grazing practices (American Sheep Industry Association 2006).


6.4.2 Infrastructure



Deadline

6.4.2.1. Research mitigation and crediting

programs used by other states and the federal

government in shrubsteppe or other habitats

(e.g., wetlands). Compile results and develop

options for mitigation and crediting program for

sagebrush steppe habitats in Idaho.

SAC Mitigation

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC

The Mitigation Subcommittee researched a variety

of mitigation and crediting programs. Options from



grouse habitat in Idaho.


2010

6.4.2.2. Develop proposal for a mitigation and

crediting program for sagebrush steppe habitats

in Idaho with on-site mitigation as the primary

priority and develop recommendations for policy

consideration.

SAC Mitigation

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC, SAC TAT

The Mitigation Subcommittee presented a draft of a


federal agencies, and the SAC August-October

2010. In December 2010, the SAC approved the

mitigation framework to be submitted for

consideration by relevant entities. In early 2011,

the Mitigation Subcommittee presented the

framework to IDFG, BLM, FS, OSC, Office of

Energy Resources, the Governor’s Office, the Idaho

Association of Counties, and Rocky Mountain

Power. Some minor changes were made after these

meetings. In August 2011, the Mitigation

Subcommittee submitted the proposal to IDFG and

OSC for consideration. The agencies replied they

could not provide a definitive response but commit

to being as timely as the need for multi-level state

coordination allows.

Next Steps: Finalize


2010

6.4.2.3. Implement appropriate timing

stipulations for construction and maintenance

activities on federal land and encourage on state,

private, and tribal land within 1 km of occupied

leks; emphasize timing restrictions in Rights of

Way issuances, project planning, and

maintenance of existing structures. On state

lands, IDL to coordinate with IDFG to identify

lek locations early in project planning phase.

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG, Shoshone-

Paiute Tribes

BLM issued IM ID-2009-006 which directs BLM

personnel to adopt sage-grouse conservation

measures in the State Plan, including the use of

timing restrictions for human disturbance around

leks.

The Curlew National Grassland Plan requires

timing stipulations of activities and restricts some

activities to reduce disturbance of leks.

Next Steps: Ongoing

IDL will implement

procedures to contact IDFG

prior to any installation.




Deadline

6.4.2.4. Develop a collision risk assessment

process to be used by land management

agencies, IDFG, NRCS, DOE, and landowners

(volunteer basis) when placing new fences or

other tall structures (e.g., wind towers,

communication towers, MET towers,

transmission lines) in sage-grouse habitat.

Utilize conservation measures in section 4.3.2.3

(page 4-42) and 4.3.4.3. (page 4-63) until

completed.

BLM, IDFG Target Deadline: After

completion of University of

Idaho tall structures study

(expected by May 2011).

6.4.2.5. Upon completion of University of Idaho

tall structures study, SAC (Chapter 6

Subcommittee) will reconvene to consider how

to use collision risk assessment and

recommended actions on planned and existing

structures.

SAC Stevens, B. S. 2011. Impacts of fences on greater

sage-grouse in Idaho: collision, mitigation, and

spatial ecology. MS thesis, University of Idaho,

Moscow.

Target Deadline:

December 2011.

6.4.2.6. Recommend that all new anemometer

(MET) towers be self-supporting, or, if guy

wires are needed, require that they have

permanent markers along their entire length to

increase visibility to birds and reduce collision

risk.

BLM BLM IM-2009-006.

Next Steps: Ongoing

6.4.2.7. Avoid the placement of new MET

towers within 2 miles of active sage-grouse leks

(Connelly et al. 2000) unless they are out of the

direct line of sight of the active lek.

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG

BLM IM-2009-006.

Addressed in Curlew National Grassland Plan 2002.

Next Steps: Ongoing

IDL will review the

location of MET towers on

IDL land with IDFG prior

to installation. IDL will

implement procedures to

contact IDFG prior to any

installation.

6.4.2.8. Identify specific roads or road sections

where sage-grouse mortality has been

documented. Work collaboratively with the

appropriate agency(s) to develop measures to

reduce the risk of road-related mortality of sage-

LWGs Upper Snake: The A2 road from Dubois to Kilgore

was identified as a road segment with potential to

create hazards to lekking sage-grouse. Road was

monitored during spring 2010 and high use areas

were mapped. Measures were developed to


2010

Next Steps: Explore

possibility for and

implications of “sage-




Deadline

grouse. Consider speed limits, brush control,

signing, and public education.

encourage birds to stay off the roadway. These

measures will be implemented in 2011.

“Sage-grouse Crossing” signs were installed at lek

sites on the Red Road.

In 2010, the Great Basin Restoration Initiative

Workgroup prepared the document titled

“Considerations for Strategically Reducing Fuels

and Wildfires on Public Lands in the Great Basin

with Targeted Grazing.” The document is available

to interested parties via BLM State Offices.

grouse crossing” signs.

6.4.2.9. Coordinate with the Idaho Office of

Energy Resources to regularly obtain updated

geospatial information on new and proposed

energy projects (e.g., wind energy and MET

towers; electrical transmission; geothermal

development; and oil and gas pipelines) and

associated infrastructure (e.g., distribution lines

and roads). Consider posting data on

www.insideidaho.org

SAC TAT Not able to accomplish. Target Deadline: Set up

process by July 1, 2010.

6.4.2.10. SAC to stay informed and consider

commenting on infrastructure projects in

coordination with LWGs.

SAC, in

coordination with

LWGs

SAC submitted comment letter on Mountain States

Transmission Intertie (MSTI) in 2008.

Next Steps: Ongoing

6.4.2.11. Work with utilities (energy and

communications) to site new infrastructure

projects away from occupied leks and identified

important seasonal habitats, in accordance with

section 4.3.2.3 (pages 4-42 to 4-46).

LWGs, BLM, FS,

IDFG, and IDL, in

coordination with

utilities.

Challis: LWG influenced transmission line siting;

developer chose to avoid key habitat.

EIU: Letters sent regarding UAMPS Horse Butte

project. The company provided lek data to IDFG

based on their monitoring. LWG will continue

providing comments on the Gateway West project

as opportunities arise.

Jarbidge: LWG member comments on the China

Mountain Sage-grouse Conservation Plan.

North Magic: Continued to be involved with the

Friedman Airport Relocation, SWIP and MSTI

updates, and any pending wind farm applications in


Next steps: IDL will


contact IDFG early in

planning process.

http://www.insideidaho.org/




Deadline

their planning area.

Owyhee: Owyhee County SGLWG drafted

language for a September 2010 County

Commission Letter addressing concern “…that the

southernmost alternative for Segment 9 of Gateway

West would adversely affect Greater Sage-grouse

populations.” The Commission letter continued

with the following language drafted by the LWG,

“The alternative route for Segment 9 that runs south

of Highway 78 will impact important sage-grouse

habitat in Owyhee County. This proposed route

runs near dozens of known leks that are currently

occupied by sage-grouse in the Owyhee Foothills.

The Local Working Group feels that this is the least

desirable alternative because the transmission line

will attract avian predators, especially Common

Ravens. Raptors and ravens use transmission lines

for nesting, perching and roosting. Studies have

shown that ravens are important nest predators of

sage-grouse and that ravens move an average of 7

km and as far as 60 km from transmission line

roosts each day. In addition, new roads required for

this alternative would create extensive shrub loss

and habitat fragmentation in previously undisturbed

areas.

The alternative (9D) that runs through the Morley

Nelson Snake River Birds of Prey National

Conservation Area (NCA) is a much better

alternative. It would not affect Greater Sage-grouse

because sage-grouse do not occur within the NCA.

It would be compatible with maintaining raptor

populations and the goals of the NCA. Research

has demonstrated that properly designed

transmission lines can be compatible with raptors.”

Upper Snake: The LWG will continue to provide

comments on the Mountain States Transmission

Intertie project as appropriate. IDFG and BLM




Deadline

both provided comments on the Areva project.

6.4.2.12. For existing structures, work with

utilities (energy and communications) to identify

and implement appropriate mitigation measures

near occupied leks and identified important

seasonal habitats.

LWGs, BLM, FS,

and IDL, in

coordination with

utilities.

Challis: Reauthorized one transmission line (30

year renewal) requiring perch deterrents within

sage-grouse priority areas.


6.4.2.13. Evaluate and consider the scale of

impacts of current, proposed, and potential

increased use of roads and trails in terms of

disturbance to occupied leks or identified

important seasonal habitats. Work with

appropriate land management or other agency to

identify solutions to reduce the impacts to sage-

grouse, while considering routine administrative

and permitted use. See also discussion in 4.3.5.3

on human disturbance and management of

livestock in 6.4.4 and 6.4.5.

BLM, FS, IDL,

NPS, and DOE in

conjunction with

LWGs

The BLM Challis Field Office completed a Travel

Management Plan in 2008, addressing impacts to

sage-grouse and other wildlife.

Target Deadline: In

conjunction with

development of Travel

Management Plans or

review of new projects.

6.4.3 Annual Grassland

Because the 2006 State Plan did not include noxious weeds and invasive plants as a separate threat, we will include milestones related

to these issues under the Annual Grassland threat.



Deadline

6.4.3.1. Promote washing of vehicle

undercarriage to minimize potential to transport

seeds and plant parts of noxious weeds and

invasive plants, including cheatgrass.

SAC Education

subcommittee in

cooperation with

Cooperative Weed

Management Areas

Don’t Pack a Pest educational brochure is available

for download at:

http://www.agri.state.id.us/Categories/

PlantsInsects/NoxiousWeeds/Documents/nwffs/pac

kapest.pdf

The Education Subcommittee will not develop

separate educational materials at this time. The

SAC TAT is working on a portion of this issue in

6.4.5.3.


2010




Deadline

6.4.3.2. Review available cheatgrass occurrence

maps and determine which would be most

suitable for sage-grouse habitat mapping needs.

SAC TAT, in

coordination with

BLM

Don Major, BLM, presented information on

cheatgrass mapping at the October SAC meeting.

Several SAC TAT members and others met

February 15, 2011 to further discuss.

Target Deadline: 2010.

6.4.3.3. Identify priority annual grasslands for

restoration.

SAC TAT in

coordination with

LWGs

Updated target deadline December 2011. This task

will be accomplished in combination with

Restoration Emphasis Areas 6.6.2.

Target Deadline: Based on

completion of 6.4.3.2.

6.4.3.4. Distribute prioritized annual grassland

maps to LWGs.

SAC TAT Updated target deadline March 2012 in the 2011

LWG Annual Report,

Target Deadline: Based on

completion of 6.4.3.3.

6.4.3.5. Require users of federal public lands to

utilize certified weed-free forage.

BLM, FS The FS requires Certified Noxious Weed Free

Forage on all National Forests in southern Idaho.

Next Steps: Idaho BLM

EA was completed in

2009. Publication of

Supplemental Federal Rule

is pending.

6.4.3.6. Encourage state land management

agencies and users and private landowners to

utilize certified weed-free forage.

SAC SAC wrote letter to IDL, IDFG, and Idaho

Governor’s Office, April 2010

IDFG has approved the requirement of certified

weed-free hay, straw, and mulch on its land.

In September 2010, BLM published a

supplementary Proposed Rule in the Federal

Register that would require the use of certified

weed-free hay, straw and mulch on BLM-managed

lands in Idaho. Pending completion.

Target Deadline: SAC to

write letter to IDL, IDFG,

and Idaho Governor’s

Office, April 2010

6.4.3.7. Establish fuel breaks to limit the growth

and size of annual grassland (See also 6.4.1.8.).

BLM, FS, NRCS,

in coordination

with Great Basin

Initiative

FS identified and implemented fuel breaks on the

Curlew National Grasslands in 2007 and 2008 in

order to protect remaining areas of unburned

sagebrush.

BLM identified and implemented fuel breaks on the

Big Desert in 2007-2011.


6.4.3.8. Create and distribute a “watch list” of

invasive plant species that can potentially alter

sage-grouse habitats.

IDFG, ISDA,

Cooperative Weed

Management


2010 and annually

thereafter.




Deadline

Areas, in

cooperation with

LWGs.

6.4.4 Livestock Impacts



Deadline

6.4.4.1. Identify areas where livestock

management-related activities are repeatedly

displacing sage-grouse on active leks and work

with livestock managers to avoid problem areas

during the lekking season (see page 4-61 and 4-

62 for specific dates).

LWGs, with

support from BLM,

FS, IDL, SAC TAT

BLM identifies livestock/sage-grouse conflicts

during rangeland health evaluations, and works with

permittees to find solutions.

Big Desert: Craters of the Moon Nation Monument

Travel Management Plan identified lek locations

and restrictions; BLM distributed maps to

permittees in 2010 identifying lek locations and

timing restrictions.

Target Deadline:

December 31, 2010, with

annual review thereafter.

6.4.4.2. Provide livestock managers with maps

of lek locations to address 6.4.4.1.

IDFG, BLM, FS,

IDL, in

coordination with

LWGs

Challis: Provided maps with lek locations to all

permittees.

Target Deadline: At annual

turn-out meeting or upon

request, starting in 2010.

6.4.4.3. Identify and map expiring CRP lands

that are suitable for livestock forage reserves.

Livestock forage reserves would provide

livestock operators with temporary alternative

forage during times when resting is needed for

sage-grouse habitat restoration (see also page 4-

59).

Farm Service

Agency (FSA),

ISDA, Idaho Cattle

Association (ICA),

Idaho

Woolgrowers

Association

(IWGA)

Target Deadline:

September 2010

6.4.4.4. Identify and map livestock forage

reserves on federal land.

BLM, FS 2 forage reserves on the Caribou-Targhee National

Forest. One new FS forage reserve in planning.

1 BLM forage reserve near Burley and 2 near

Aberdeen.

Target Deadline: Provide

GIS of existing reserves to

NRCS by September 2010

and update as new reserves

become available.

6.4.4.5. Identify funding for expiring CRP land IDFG, NRCS, NRCS has EQIP funding to assist producers with Target Deadline:




Deadline

to be used as livestock forage reserves BLM, ISDA, ICA,

IWGA, LWGs

fencing and water developments to convert the

expired CRP as grazing land.

September 1, 2010 and

annually thereafter

6.4.4.6. Identify cost-share funding for livestock

forage reserves on private land that need

associated livestock-management facilities (e.g.,

fences and water developments).

IDFG, NRCS,

BLM, ISDA, ICA,

IWGA, LWGs

NRCS has EQIP funding to assist producers with



Target Deadline:

September 1, 2010and

annually thereafter

6.4.4.7. Consolidate maps and information about

available livestock forage reserves. Provide

information to livestock operators as needed.

NRCS, in

coordination with

IDFG, BLM,

ISDA, FSA, FS,

ICA, IWGA,

LWGs

Target Deadline:

December 31, 2010

6.4.4.8. In NRCS Prescribed Grazing Standard

and Specification, reference sage-grouse

conservation measures (section 4.3.4.3 and

Appendix D)

NRCS Completed. Target Deadline: June 30,

2010

6.4.4.9. Develop a collision risk assessment

process to be used by land management

agencies, IDFG, NRCS, and landowners

(volunteer basis) when placing new fences in

sage-grouse habitat. Utilize conservation

measures on pages 4-63 and 4-64 until

assessment and review is completed.

BLM, IDFG Stevens, B. S. 2011. Impacts of fences on greater

sage-grouse in Idaho: collision, mitigation, and

spatial ecology. MS thesis, University of Idaho,

Moscow.

Target Deadline: After

completion of University of

Idaho tall structures study

(expected by May 2011).

6.4.4.10. Upon completion of University of

Idaho tall structures study, SAC (Chapter 6

Subcommittee) will reconvene to consider how

to use collision risk assessment and

recommended actions on temporary, planned,

and existing fences.

SAC Target Deadline:

December 2011.

6.4.4.11. Continue collaborative efforts with

livestock managers to implement conservation

measures in State Plan and LWG plans. Seek

opportunities to apply flexible adaptive

management based on monitoring and evaluation

BLM, FS, NRCS,

IDFG, IDL,

University of Idaho

(e.g., Range

Extension

Agencies worked with landowner to bury a new

power line supplying power for irrigation in Small,

Idaho.

BLM identifies livestock/sage-grouse conflicts

during rangeland health evaluations, and works with





Deadline

(pages 5-30 and 5-31) in order to provide

benefits to sage-grouse and their habitats.

Specialists),

LWGs, in

cooperation with

livestock managers

permittees to find solutions.

6.4.5 Human Disturbance



Deadline

6.4.5.1. Implement appropriate timing

stipulations for construction and maintenance

activities on federal land and encourage on state,

private, and tribal land within 1 km of occupied

leks; emphasize timing restrictions in Rights of

Way issuances, project planning, and

maintenance of existing structures. On state

lands, IDL to coordinate with IDFG to identify

lek locations early in project planning phase.

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG, Shoshone-

Paiute Tribes





leks.




Next Steps: Ongoing

IDL will implement

procedures to contact IDFG

prior to any installation.

6.4.5.2. In NRCS Prescribed Grazing Standard

and Specification, reference sage-grouse

conservation measures relative to human

disturbance (section 4.3.4.3 and Appendix D, see

also livestock impacts 6.4.4.8).

NRCS Completed. Target Deadline:

December 2009

6.4.5.3. Develop conservation measures for OHV,

mountain bike, and other organized recreational

events in sage-grouse habitats to minimize

impacts to leks and identified important seasonal

habitats.

SAC TAT, BLM,

FS, IDL, Idaho

Parks and

Recreation

The FS develops conservation measures during

Travel Planning on each forest that has sage-grouse

habitat.

SAC approved conservation measure November

20112. The SAC will submit a letter to the affect

agencies requesting support for the conservation

measure.

Target Deadline: SAC

TAT to research

appropriate conservation

measures by April 1, 2010.

Consideration by land

management agencies

during planning and

permitting OHV and

2 See conservation measure below




Deadline

mountain bike events.

6.4.5.4. Incorporate conservation measures from

State Plan (page 4-70), LWG plans, and tribal

ordinances when developing travel management

plans. Seek opportunities to apply flexible

adaptive management based on monitoring and

evaluation in order to provide benefits to sage-

grouse and their habitats.

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG, and tribes

(when applicable)

IDL identifies “non-use” areas in temporary permits

and leases related to OHV activities.

Challis BLM Field Office Travel Plan was

completed summer 2008.

Target Deadline: Ongoing,

and during development of

travel management plans.

Forests in southern Idaho

will have completed travel

management plans by

September 2009.

Human disturbance conservation measure approved November 2011.

Issue Addressed Rationale Conservation Measure(s)

Organized recreational

events, including but

not limited to OHV,

car/truck, motorcycle,

mountain bike races,

horse rides, and bird

dog trials

Organized recreational

events can disturb sage-

grouse, cause collision-

related mortalities or

injury, adversely impact

vegetation and soils, and

increase risk of invasive

plants and fires.

1. Organized recreational events should occur in areas

designated for motorized and mechanized events

whenever possible.

2. Organized recreational events should have location and/or

timing restrictions to protect sage-grouse with an

emphasis on avoiding disturbance during the breeding

season and in known wintering and late brood-rearing

areas. Restrictions should address disturbance and

collision risk along the entire route, start and end points,

and staging areas. Managers should use the best available

information to ensure that noise buffers are adequate to

protect sage-grouse, taking into consideration the nature

of the event (e.g. mountain bike vs OHV), and local

conditions such as topography.

3. Managers should encourage event organizers to request

that race participants and attendees wash all vehicles and

undercarriages prior to attending the event to minimize

spread of invasive plants and noxious weeds.

4. Managers should ensure readiness to respond to a wildfire

initiated during a recreational event in sage-grouse

habitat.


6.4.6 West Nile Virus



Deadline

6.4.6.1. When practical, draw blood from trapped

sage-grouse to test for presence of West Nile

virus (WNv) antibodies. During WNv season,

throat swabs should be collected to test for active

WNv.

IDFG and other

cooperators,

including the

Shoshone-Paiute

Tribes.

51 captured sage-grouse were tested for WNv in the

Owyhees in 2007 and 2008 (45 blood tests, 51

throat swabs); 32 captured sage-grouse were tested

for WNv by the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes on the

Duck Valley Indian Reservation in 2007 and 2008

(19 by blood, 13 by oral swabs.

Ongoing monitoring in the Owyhees 2009-2011.

Next steps: Ongoing and

seasonally.

6.4.6.2. Cooperate with mosquito abatement

districts and state-level WNv monitoring (e.g.,

mosquito monitoring and human cases) to track

potential for WNv outbreaks. Communicate with

IDFG regional staff when an outbreak could

affect sage-grouse in their area.

IDFG health lab West Central Local Working Group worked with

the local mosquito abatement district to monitor

ponds for WNv mosquitoes.


6.4.6.3. Increase monitoring of sage-grouse

during WNv outbreaks. Monitoring methods

may include radio-telemetry and on-the-ground

monitoring for sage-grouse deaths around known

late brood-rearing habitats (e.g., wetlands, springs

and ponds). In addition, agency field staff and

the public are encouraged to report dead birds to

the IDFG regional office.

IDFG, Shoshone-

Paiute Tribes, and

other cooperators

51 sage-grouse in the Owyhees were radio-collared

and monitored weekly during the WNv season in

2007 and 2008. Fifteen sage-grouse were captured

and monitored on the Duck Valley Indian

Reservation in 2007. Radio-collars transmitting

mortality signals were located on the ground

immediately and dead birds were submitted to the

IDFG Health Lab for WNv testing.

No WNv outbreaks documented 2009-2011.

Next steps: During periods

of potential WNv outbreak


6.4.7 Prescribed Fire



Deadline

6.4.7.1. Require SAC-sponsored projects

proposing sagebrush control provide site-specific

data justifying treatment.

Encourage all project proponents to consider

sage-grouse habitat needs as described in the

State Plan (see page 4-79).

SAC

Land management

agencies, NRCS,

and private

landowners

BLM issued IM 2009-006, directing districts and

field offices to use the State Plan and completed

Local Working Group Plans as references to

support and guide project planning.

Added language to RFP documents for OSC

funding in 2010 and 2011 funding round.

NRCS consults with IDFG before conducting

sagebrush control.

Target Deadline: April 1,

2010 and ongoing

6.4.7.2. Incorporate sage-grouse conservation

measures related to brush management into

conservation planning (see page 4-79).

NRCS Completed August 2008

Next Steps: Ongoing

implementation

6.4.8 Seeded Perennial Grassland



Deadline

6.4.8.1. Encourage establishment of sagebrush

and desirable forbs and grasses into seeded

perennial grasslands.

LWGs, NRCS,

IDFG, land

management

agencies, private

landowners

The BLM Fire, Fuels and Related Vegetation

Management Direction Plan Amendment,

completed for southeast and south-central Idaho in

2008, provides for diversification of perennial grass

seedlings.

Big Desert: projects reported in Appendix D.

Challis: Ongoing

EIU: NRCS and IDFG are encouraging the use of

native forbs and grasses, including pollinators, as

opportunities arise.

Curlew: BLM is implementing this during

restoration projects; NRCS is putting forbs in all

plantings going into land formerly under the

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).





Deadline

Shoshone Basin: Mule Creek Fire Rehabilitation

South Magic: Always recommend to land

management agencies to add desirable forbs and

grasses (native if possible) to all seeding mixes.

Upper Snake: BLM does this on an ongoing basis;

NRCS does this on an ongoing basis on CRP lands.

6.4.8.2. Encourage livestock grazing or habitat

conservation of expiring CRP over tillage,

cropping, or development.

LWGs, NRCS,

IDFG, private

landowners

EIU: NRCS discusses this with landowners when

private land is retiring from CRP program.

Curlew: NRCS has put prescribed grazing systems

on former CRP lands.

North Magic: Through NRCS’s SGI, re-enrolled

landowners in CRP on the Camas Prairie.

Upper Snake: IDFG has a farm bill coordinator in

Region 6 and that individual does this on an

ongoing basis. IDFG also cooperates with

Pheasants Forever on an additional farm bill

coordinator position stationed in Blackfoot but

available to work in the Upper Snake Sage-grouse

Planning Area.

Target Deadline:

September 2010 and

annually thereafter

6.4.8.3. Encourage FSA to incorporate

information into FSA monthly newsletter

regarding use of expiring CRP lands to benefit

sage-grouse.

SAC TAT IDFG and NRCS worked together to encourage

CRP sign-ups in September.

IDFG and NRCS have submitted an article that is

expected to be published in April 2011.

Target Deadline:

September 2010 and

annually thereafter

6.4.8.4. Identify funding or other incentives for

expired CRP land to be used for livestock grazing

or habitat conservation over tillage, cropping, or

development.

IDFG, NRCS,

BLM, ISDA, ICA,

IWGA, LWGs

NRCS has EQIP funding to assist producers with



Target Deadline:

September 2010 and

annually thereafter


6.4.9 Climate Change



Deadline

6.4.9.1. Collect and interpret climate change

information significant to sage-grouse and sage-

grouse habitat. Disseminate to SAC and LWGs.

SAC TAT, in

coordination with

USGS, Great Basin

Restoration

Initiative, and FS

Research Stations

Revised target deadline October 2011 for a potential

presentation on Don Major’s work.

Target Deadline: October

2010 and ongoing

6.4.9.2. Explore scenario planning relative to

climate change and sagebrush steppe.

Disseminate to SAC and LWGs.

SAC TAT Revised target deadline October 2012. Target Deadline: October

2011


6.4.10 Conifer Encroachment



Deadline

6.4.10.1. Conduct statewide mapping effort to

quantify impact of conifer encroachment near

leks and other seasonally important habitats.

BLM, FS, IDFG Target Deadline: April

2011

6.4.10.2. Evaluate and disseminate information

on the effectiveness, economic and technical

feasibility, and lessons learned from various

conifer removal treatments.

LWGs, SAC TAT,

land management

agencies, USGS,

and FS Research

Stations.

Revised target deadline spring 2011.

The SAC TAT will pursue having an expert write

an article about juniper control for the Spring 2011

SAC newsletter.

The Nature Conservancy, in partnership with the

Owyhee LWG, IDFG and ranchers, implemented

juniper mastication on 3 sites in the Owyhees,

effectively improving nesting and brood rearing

habitat on 1,010 acres. TNC is monitoring the

project outcomes. They also conducted a cost

analysis comparing 2 different treatments (roller-

drum masticator on smaller trees and mastication by

excavator on larger trees).


2010 and annually

thereafter

6.4.10.3. Encourage biomass utilization of

removed conifers.

BLM, FS, IDFG, in

coordination with

Rocky Mountain

Elk Foundation and

Southwest Idaho

Wildlife Habitat

Conservation

Partnership

BLM currently encourages biomass utilization in

fuels contracts.

Caribou-Targhee National Forest has initiated a

collaborative effort to encourage biomass utilization

in eastern Idaho.



6.4.11 Isolated Populations



Deadline

6.4.11.1. Refine criteria for and revisit

populations identified as isolated (see page 4-99)

and identify populations at risk of becoming

isolated.

IDFG, in

cooperation with

LWGs

EIU: Ongoing telemetry work and aerial surveys

are designed to identify populations and determined

if isolated populations exist within the planning

area.

Jarbidge: BLM mapping of isolated populations

and core sage-grouse areas.

Target Deadline:

December 2010 and

ongoing

6.4.11.2. Ensure that hunting regulations are

consistent with maintaining the viability of

isolated populations.

IDFG, in

cooperation with

LWGs

Closed 2008 sage-grouse hunting season in East

Idaho Uplands due to concerns of isolated

populations.

Target Deadline: July 2010

and annually thereafter

6.4.11.3. If a population is determined to be

isolated, investigate the potential causes for the

isolation and explore opportunities to restore

connectivity of habitat and populations.

IDFG, LWGs, land

management

agencies, and

private landowners

Target Deadline:

December 2011

6.4.11.4. Evaluate predator populations to

determine if they are having a negative impact on

the viability of isolated populations (See section

4.3.12.3, pages 4-107 to 4-108).

IDFG, Animal and

Plant Health

Inspection Service

– Wildlife Services

(APHIS-WS), in

cooperation with

LWGs.


after identification of

isolated populations


6.4.12 Predation



Deadline

6.4.12.1. Collect available studies and

information on predation effects on sage-grouse,

disseminate information, and identify additional

research needs.

SAC TAT, in

coordination with

LWGs

Five new studies on predation effects have been

published since the SAB chapter was written.

A SAC TAT member summarized and synthesized

the information and wrote an article for the Spring

2011 SAC newsletter.

There were 5 presentations on predation issues at the

November 2011 SAC meeting:

Biology and population trends of the raven (Corvus

corax) in the Great Basin, by Rob Lonsinger, IDFG.

Results of raven study on INL, by Kristy Howe, ISU.

Relationship between human footprint and ravens, by

Steve Hanser, USGS.

Factors that influence sage-grouse nest predation, by

Zach Lochyer, ISU.

Sage-grouse population ecology in Strawberry

Valley, Utah – what we’ve learned after 14 years of

consecutive research, by Rick Baxter, BYU.


2010

6.4.12.2. Identify areas where excessive predation

may occur. If excessive predation is documented

to be limiting a sage-grouse population, follow

detailed procedures outlined in State Plan (see

section 4.3.12.2.1, page 4-105 to 4-108).

IDFG, APHIS-WS,

LWGs


6.4.12.3. If excessive predation is documented to

be limiting a sage-grouse population, following

detailed procedures outlined in State Plan (see

section 4.3.12.2.1, page 4-105 to 4-108),

experimentally implement and evaluate

effectiveness of predator control measures on

sage-grouse populations and predators.

IDFG, APHIS-WS,

LWGs


6.4.12.4. Review existing data to identify typical IDFG, APHIS-WS The following is a link to Kristy Howe’s thesis Target Deadline:


(baseline) densities of sage-grouse predators in

different habitats, landscapes, and seasons (see

pages 4-105 and 4-108). Pursue research or

monitoring activities to fill in knowledge gaps

and identify parameters to define abnormal

densities. Initial priorities are to look at corvids

and red fox.

presentation on raven populations at the INL:

http://media.itrc.isu.edu/videos/?v=events/biologycls/

howe_defense120911.flv

December 2010

6.4.13 Urban/Exurban



Deadline

6.4.13.1. Identify sage-grouse habitat most

vulnerable to conversion to urban/exurban

development.

LWGs Big Desert: One county commissioner attended the

June field tour.

Challis: Salmon-Challis National Forest has

identified 3 private in-holdings in sage-grouse

habitat that are vulnerable to development.

EIU: Addressed in draft Conservation Plan

North Magic: Identified in Urban Threats section

of local plan (in progress)

South Magic: Identified area from valley floor

from Elba to Almo as vulnerable.


6.4.13.2. Inform and encourage county

government planning and zoning organizations to

consider sage-grouse habitat needs.

LWGs, IDFG,

OSC

Challis: IDFG commented through the county

comprehensive planning process.

EIU: One LWG member recently submitted

comments to Bonneville County regarding proposed

wind development area. In addition, IDFG

personnel have provided comments at planning and

zoning (P&Z) meetings.

Curlew: Ongoing. Oneida County Commissioners

are actively participating in the LWG.

Owyhee: During the creation of the Owyhee

County Comprehensive Land Use Plan and

supporting Zoning Ordinances, County SGLWG

and Natural Resources Committee members were





Deadline

actively involved in proposing elements of the code

regarding species considerations. As a result, one

of the elements of the County Code which an

applicant for a Conditional Use Permit must meet

deals with harm to species.

Upper Snake: LWG members attend/participate in

Bonneville, Clark, Fremont, and Jefferson County

P&Z planning processes

West Central: LWG is presently engaged with

Washington and Adams counties planning and

zoning.

6.4.13.3. Inform and encourage local land trusts

to consider sage-grouse habitat needs in

conservation planning.

LWGs EIU: Ongoing encouragement to the Sagebrush

Steppe Regional Land Trust

North Magic: Wood River Land Trust participates

in LWG meetings.


6.4.13.4. Encourage the use of conservation

easements to protect sage-grouse habitats.

IDFG, LWGs,

NRCS

In 2010 and 2011NRCS enrolled 33,500 acres in

permanent GRP easements that restrict development

and cropping and use prescribed grazing to maintain

or improve sage-grouse habitats.


6.4.13.5. When doing land exchanges and

acquisitions, consider sage-grouse habitat.

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG

BLM gives full consideration to important wildlife

habitat objectives and other factors when

participating in land exchanges, in accordance with

43 Code of Federal Regulations Chapter II Section

2200.0-6(b).

FS policy requires that sage-grouse be considered in

land exchanges and acquisitions.




government in shrubsteppe or other habitats (e.g.,

wetlands). Compile results and develop options

for mitigation and crediting program for


SAC Mitigation

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC







2010

6.4.13.7. Develop proposal for a mitigation and SAC Mitigation The Mitigation Subcommittee presented a draft of a Next Steps: Finalize




Deadline



consideration.

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC, SAC TAT


















2010

6.4.13.8. Document and report sagebrush acreage

converted to urban/exurban development

annually by county.

SAC TAT, in

cooperation with

LWGs

In 2009-2010 we asked the LWGs to document

acreage converted in their LWG annual report.

However, acreage information is not often

available. In 2011, the SAC TAT revised the LWG

Annual Report Form to better address this question

by tracking trends in conversion. We asked

whether the amount of key habitat lost to

urban/exurban had shown: 1) a major increase; 2) a

minor increase; 3) no change; or 4) the LWG did

not know the answer.

Target Deadline: Report in

Statewide LWG Annual

Report.


6.4.14 Sagebrush Control



Deadline

6.4.14.1. Require SAC-sponsored projects

proposing sagebrush control provide site-specific

data justifying treatment.

Encourage all project proponents to consider

sage-grouse habitat needs as described in the

State Plan (see page 4-79).

SAC

Land management

agencies, NRCS,

and private

landowners

Added language to RFP documents for OSC

funding in 2010 and 2011 funding round.

NRCS conferenced with USFWS on potential

adverse effects of conservation practices on sage-

grouse and now incorporates conservation measures

into all practice specifications when installed in

sage-grouse habitat.


2010 and ongoing

6.4.14.2. Incorporate sage-grouse conservation

measures related to brush management into

conservation planning (see page 4-79).

NRCS Completed August 2008

Next Steps: Ongoing

implementation

6.4.15 Insecticides



Deadline

6.4.15.1. Identify agricultural fields that are used

by sage-grouse during the late brood-rearing

period and that might be a concern for insecticide

application. Inform landowners about how to

reduce potential impacts.

LWGs, IDFG,

NRCS, University

of Idaho extension,

ISDA


and ongoing

6.4.15.2. Continue to collaborate closely to

ensure annual control efforts for Mormon crickets

and grasshoppers, focus on key problem areas,

better delineate treatment avoidance areas,

determine the treatment of least risk to sage-

grouse and monitor results.

BLM, FS, ISDA,

IDFG, APHIS,

LWGs

BLM State Office and Districts coordinate annually

with APHIS.

EIU: communication with APHIS and BLM to

assure the LWG is made aware of annual treatment

plans within the planning area.

Target Deadline: During

annual or periodic updates

of Mormon Cricket and

Grasshopper Control

Environmental

Assessments.

6.4.15.3. Cooperate with mosquito abatement

districts as needed.

IDFG health lab Target Deadline: Ongoing


6.4.16 Agricultural Expansion



Deadline

6.4.16.1. Identify sage-grouse habitat most

vulnerable to agricultural conversion

LWGs Upper Snake: IDFG has identified habitat that is

vulnerable to conversion in Clark, Fremont, and

Jefferson counties.


6.4.16.2. Document and report sagebrush acreage

converted to agriculture annually by county.

SAC TAT, NRCS,

in cooperation with

LWGs

However, acreage information is not often

available. In 2011, the SAC TAT revised the LWG

Annual Report Form to better address this question

by tracking trends in conversion. We asked

whether the amount of key habitat lost to

agricultural conversion had shown: 1) a major

increase; 2) a minor increase; 3) no change; or 4)

the LWG did not know the answer.

Target Deadline: Report in


Report.

6.4.16.3. Inform and encourage local land trusts

to consider sage-grouse habitat needs in

conservation planning.

LWGs EIU: Ongoing encouragement to the Sagebrush

Steppe Regional Land Trust

North Magic: Wood River Land Trust participates

in LWG meetings.


6.4.16.4. Encourage the use of conservation

easements or other alternatives to protect sage-

grouse habitats.

IDFG, LWGs,

NRCS

In 2010 and 2011NRCS enrolled 33,500 acres in

permanent GRP easements that restrict development

and cropping and use prescribed grazing to maintain

or improve sage-grouse habitats.


6.4.17 Sport Hunting



Deadline

6.4.17.1. Analyze existing wing data to determine

the differences in sex and age of the harvest

during opening weekend, compared to later in the

season, and summarize other long-term trends.

IDFG

Preliminary analysis indicates there is no difference

in sex and age ratios in the harvest between

September and October.

Next Steps: Continual and

ongoing

6.4.17.2. Utilize the Hunting Season and Bag-

limit Guidelines, as provided in the State Plan

(Table 4-14, page 4-122), to guide hunting season

recommendations by SGPA or other population

IDFG, in

coordination with

LWGs

For the 2008-2011 season, IDFG used the Hunting

Season and Bag-limit Guidelines as provided in the

State Plan (Table 4-14, page 4-122).

Next Steps: July, annually




Deadline

units that may be appropriate or needed (e.g.,

isolated populations). In cases of catastrophic

events or other unique circumstances, the IDFG

Director can issue an Emergency Closure in an

area on short notice.

6.4.17.3. Review Hunting Season and Bag-limit

Guidelines based on additional data, updated

research, and analysis.

IDFG Target Deadline: October

2010 and ongoing

6.4.17.4. Consider the feasibility and potential

value of implementing a permit system with

mandatory reporting by all sage-grouse hunters.

IDFG The Department increased the mail-in wing

envelope effort in-lieu of a mandatory report.


2010

6.4.17.5. Resolve sage-grouse harvest reporting

zone boundaries.

IDFG Completed 2009. Target Deadline:

December 31, 2009

6.4.17.6. Explore opportunities to collect more

wings from harvested sage-grouse (e.g., statewide

mail-in wing survey, additional wing barrels,

etc.).

IDFG, in

coordination with

LWGs

IDFG sent out 2,000 mail-in wing envelopes to

known sage-grouse hunters in 2010 and 2011.

The Upper Snake added kiosks to wing barrels to

increase their visibility and educate hunters on the

importance of submitting wings.


2010


6.4.18 Mines, Landfills, and Gravel Pits



Deadline



government in shrubsteppe or other habitats (e.g.,

wetlands). Compile results and develop options

for mitigation and crediting program for


SAC Mitigation

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC







2010

6.4.18.2. Develop proposal for a mitigation and



consideration.

SAC Mitigation

Subcommittee, in

cooperation with

OSC, SAC TAT

The Mitigation Subcommittee presented a draft of a

















Target Deadline:

December 1, 2010

6.4.18.3 Where permissible by law, regulation

and policy, and where placement of mines,

landfills and gravel pits near leks is unavoidable

or has already occurred, require timing

stipulations for construction, operations and

maintenance activities on federal land and

encourage on state, private, and tribal land within

1 km of occupied leks. Emphasize timing

restrictions, seasonal closures or other appropriate

measures, in Rights of Way issuances, project

planning and maintenance of existing

structures/operations. On State Lands, IDL will

BLM, FS, IDL,

IDFG, Shoshone-

Paiute Tribes





leks.




Target Deadline:

Immediately and ongoing.

Next steps: IDL will


contact IDFG prior to any

installation.




Deadline

coordinate with IDFG to identify lek locations

early in the planning process.

6.4.18.4. Require gravel pit operators on federal

and state (IDL) land to control noxious and

invasive weeds.

BLM, FS, IDL Target Deadline:

December 31, 2010

IDL will include language

in all leases requiring

lessees to manage noxious

weeds.

6.4.19 Falconry



Deadline

6.4.19.1. Survey falconers annually to obtain

monthly sage-grouse harvest data.

IDFG Estimated annual falconry harvest in 2006.

Conducted survey of falconers in 2010 for annual

and monthly sage-grouse harvest data. The

estimated harvest by falconers was 58 sage-grouse

in 2010.

Next Steps: Next survey

spring 2010.

6.4.19.2. Review falconer survey data and

updated data on sage-grouse lek attendance, and

evaluate the falconry hunting season.

IDFG Based on 2010 survey, the SAC determined that no

further action was needed.



6.5 Monitoring Milestones

6.5.1 Population Monitoring



Deadline

6.5.1.1. Agency partners and volunteers submit

completed lek monitoring forms to the

appropriate IDFG Wildlife Manager or data

steward for inclusion into the statewide lek

database.

BLM, FS,

volunteers

conducting lek

surveys

Implemented

Next Steps: No later than

May 15, annually.

6.5.1.2. Identify lek monitoring goals (and

primary and secondary lek routes) for SGPAs.

IDFG

Target Deadline: Continual

and ongoing

6.5.1.3. Explore the potential for initiating the

“Adopt a Lek” program for Idaho, to increase

monitoring of leks, while also ensuring that

volunteers have adequate training.

IDFG Magic Valley region began a volunteer lek survey

program in 2007.

Next Steps: Consider

feasibility of volunteer lek

survey program in other

regions and implement by

March 2010.

6.5.1.4. Develop and distribute a standardized

lek survey form and protocol to all agency

partners and volunteers to assure that data are

collected in a standardized and consistent

manner.

IDFG New 2009 lek survey form replaces 2006 lek survey

forms in State Plan.

Next Steps: Re-distribute

form and protocol by

March, 1 annually

6.5.1.5. Develop standardized protocol for aerial

surveys of known sage-grouse leks and searches

for new leks. Distribute protocol to all

cooperators.

IDFG Completed. Next Steps: Re-distribute

by March 1, annually.

6.5.1.6. Develop and distribute radio-telemetry

guidelines for sage-grouse telemetry projects.

IDFG Target Deadline: March

2010


6.5.2 Habitat Monitoring



Deadline

6.5.2.1. Review and encourage the use of the

national Sage-grouse Habitat Assessment

Framework when available.

SAC TAT The SAC TAT held a sage-grouse habitat

assessment and vegetation monitoring workshop the

3rd

day of the June SAC meeting. This workshop

included methods in the Framework.

Target Deadline: Pending

completion of Framework

document in 2010 by

national Framework team.

6.5.2.2. BLM to coordinate with IDFG, other

agencies, and LWGs during the fall/early winter

each year to acquire spatial and related data

needed for the annual update of the Sage-grouse

Habitat Planning Map.

BLM Map update and interagency coordination has been

ongoing since 2000. Improved collaboration efforts

in 2008.

Next Steps: Acquire data

from agency field-level

offices and other partners

by approximately February

1, annually.

6.5.2.3. Complete annual update of the Sage-

grouse Habitat Planning Map including acreage

summary (of key perennial grasslands, annual

grasslands, conifer encroachment, by SGPA).

Post pdf of map on the IDFG sage-grouse

website. Post GIS data on the Inside Idaho

website at www.insideidaho.org/

BLM State Office Implemented posting of map data with the 2007

update.

Next Steps: By March 1,

annually.

6.5.2.4. Develop and implement long-term

habitat and threats monitoring programs, with

the focus on: areas of priority to LWGs; habitats

associated with priority lek routes; areas where

land uses or threats have changed; or unique

areas of local or regional importance.

SAC TAT, in

cooperation with

IDFG, BLM, FS,

DOE, and LWGs

Habitat Monitoring: The SAC TAT agreed that the

scale of this task was beyond our scope. However,

the group will compile and distribute a list of

recommended standardized protocols.

Threats Monitoring: The SAC TAT identified a

need to change the way we ask LWGs to report

threats in the LWG Annual Report. In 2011, we

asked the LWGs to evaluate the status of the threats

to sage-grouse and sage-grouse habitat that they

identified in their local plans. Specifically, we

asked them to list each threat and determine

whether that threat had changed on the landscape

by: 1) a major increase; 2) minor increase; 3)

decrease; 4) no change; or 5) the LWG did not

know. New threats were also reported.

Target Deadline: March

2010





Deadline

6.5.2.5. Delineate all known sage-grouse

breeding, late brood-rearing, and winter habitat

at 1:100,000 (or 1:24,000 if possible), using best

available information.

IDFG, in

cooperation with

land management

agency biologists

and LWGs

Draft December 2009 map was based on expert

opinion, leks, and radio-telemetry locations.

The following report and resulting habitat models

are currently being considered: Knetter, S. J., L.K.

Svancara, and W.R. Bosworth. 2011. Mapping

sage-grouse habitat. Idaho Department of Fish and

Game, Boise, ID, unpublished document.

Next Steps: Draft map by

December 2009 and update

annually as additional

information becomes

available

6.5.2.6. Continue to explore and review

emerging remote-sensing tools and products that

would have the capability and accuracy to refine

or replace the Sage-grouse Habitat Planning

Map.

SAC TAT, in

coordination with

universities

The following report and resulting habitat models

are currently being considered: Knetter, S. J., L.K.

Svancara, and W.R. Bosworth. 2011. Mapping

sage-grouse habitat. Idaho Department of Fish and

Game, Boise, ID, unpublished document.


as tools and products are

developed.

6.5.2.7. Require effectiveness monitoring (pre-

and post project, where possible) and reporting

for SAC-sponsored (e.g., OSC grants) habitat

restoration efforts

SAC Added language to RFP documents for OSC

funding and incorporated into grant agreements

beginning in 2010.


2010

6.5.2.8. Provide training for habitat and

restoration monitoring to LWGs and other

interested parties to monitor local projects.



3rd

day of the June SAC meeting.


as requested


6.6 Habitat Restoration Milestones



Deadline

6.6.1. Utilize Conservation Efforts Database to

track, summarize, and report habitat

accomplishments statewide, as reported by LWGs

in their annual report.

SAC TAT, LWGs,

IDFG

Implemented in 2008. Next Steps: Updated

during LWG annual

reporting process with

results published in


Report by March 1,

annually.

6.6.2. Identify Restoration Emphasis Areas

(REAs) within each SGPA. Post pdf of map on

the IDFG sage-grouse website. Post GIS data on

the Inside Idaho website at www.insideidaho.org.

REAs are identified areas with missing, marginal,

or degraded sage-grouse habitat characteristics

that if successfully improved or restored should

result in a positive sage-grouse population

response.

IDFG/TNC, SAC

TAT, BLM, FS,

IDL, in cooperation

with LWGs

Accomplishments: Draft REA maps were

identified in most SGPAs by Fall 2008.

The SAC TAT will make REAs more

comprehensive for March 2012 update. The SAC

TAT will assure that the new REA map is readily

available to LWGs.

REAs are currently not available on Inside Idaho.

They will be posted by March 2011.

The SAC TAT will investigate including new

mapping products in the REAs process. This

should include cheatgrass and cheatgrass risk

mapping (6.4.3.2), sage-grouse breeding density

maps, juniper invasion mapping (Don Major), and

seeded perennial grasslands.

They also discussed the need to annually update the

REA map to include removing areas that are

recovering on their own.

Next Steps: Updated by

March 1, annually.

6.6.3. Require effectiveness monitoring (pre- and

post project, where possible) and reporting for

SAC-sponsored (e.g., OSC grants) habitat

restoration efforts

SAC Added language to RFP documents for OSC

funding and incorporated into grant agreements

beginning in 2010.


2010

6.6.4. Provide training for habitat and restoration

monitoring to LWGs and other interested parties

to monitor local projects.



3rd

day of the June SAC meeting.


as requested





Deadline

6.6.5. As information comes available, develop

measurable habitat restoration (based on REAs)

or maintenance goals for each SGPA during

development of LWG plans (see page 1-32).

LWGs with completed plans should confirm,

revise, or develop goals.

LWGs, in

coordination with

private landowners,

and local, state, and

federal agencies

Challis and South Magic Valley: Habitat

restoration goals are established on a project-by-

project basis.

Curlew: Forest Service has maintenance goals in

the Curlew National Grassland Land Use Plan;

Noted that NRCS has stated goals for sage-grouse

habitat restoration.


2010

6.6.6. Improve knowledge of commercial

sagebrush seed collectors by providing training in

sagebrush identification and localities of suitable

collection sites.

BLM, FS Target Deadline: April

2011

6.6.7. Explore development of a seed testing

protocol for verification of sagebrush species and

subspecies.

BLM, universities Target Deadline: April

2011

6.6.8. Make sage-grouse habitat restoration or

maintenance a priority task for IDFG Farm Bill

Coordinators using Farm Bill and other programs.

IDFG, NRCS Accomplishments: Funding presentation at LWG

workshop November 2007.

Three sage-grouse biologists were hired in 2011

through Pheasants Forever to assist with

implementation of NRCS’s Sage-grouse Initiative.

Target Deadline:

Encourage Farm Bill

Coordinators to attend

NRCS division meetings

and workshops.